[Lavapicker]

I'm surprised no one has hit you over the head with the proverbial GP bat for your comments. I've been at this for almost ten years now and have seen what you are talking about. Sadly, several times. I don't know if its getting more prevalent or if our experience allows me to notice it more. While none of us are in the interview room and can be sure of what was said, it becomes obvious when team websites tout outreaach and programs as their own and you know otherwise. Sometimes its the wording, as you mentioned, that gives the appearance that they were involved more than they were. I know you want to portray your team in the best possible light but If a team wants to stoop to that level to acquire a plastic trophy what can you do? I do believe in Karma! 5 minutes to present and then 5 to ask questions is not enough to find these inconsitencies if you ask me. Yes, I know the judges are supposed to look at team pages and the essay too but they are very restricted as well. I've asked that judges for this award come from the robotic community and are not professors and engineers who don't know the teams. Who better to know what the Chairmans is really for and if teams are embelishing their accomplishments than people who are active in robotics. Perhaps FIRST can allow more time for judges to get to know the teams so they can truly assess what a team is actually doing. How sad when teams mirror the real world of politics to bend the truth for their own favor, yet it does go on and until some changes are made it appears to be a way to win it if you are willing to stoop to that level?